"As a member of the Finance Committee I have had the unique privilege to be closely involved in formulating economic policies aimed at growing the American job market,..." Heckuva job Gordy. P.S. How's the off-shore banking industry these days?

Gordon Smith played footsie with Bush on his privatization of Soc. Sec. He needs to be hit with that. Good timing for that just as Obama hits McCain with his soc. sec. privatization scheme, which McCain has not backed away from.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1185304443/bctid1797097902

Bill R, as much as this pains me, I have to refer you to FactCheck.org to leaven your wholesale acceptance of potential misrepresentations of "McCain with his soc. sec. privatiation scheme".

You are referencing a 2005 Very Bad Idea from Bush, and, apparently, McCain's idea would be to allow those savvy and brave enough to do it, to possibly take PART of their Social Security monies and invest them. He apparently does not have a wholesale "Toss 'em all to Wall Street" stance.

I believe that NONE of our soc. sec. [sic] monies should be shopped out to these barracudas on Wall Street, but my point here is that folks are assuming that is the plan on McCain's part.

It's not. GOD that was painful.

Wish I still drank.

Gordon Smith is the most overrated politician in the history of the state of Oregon. The only reason he exists is because of the continuing failure of leadership in the democrat party of the state of Oregon. This failure includes: Kulongoski, Wyden, De Fasio, Blumenauer....... Somehow the aforementioned types have convinced themselves that anything east of the Cascades belongs to their "brother" republicans. And, to be collegial they have taken the position that Gordo and Walden can have their places in Congress because we can "all get along". The democrat leadership in this state (and I use the term leadership with great reservation) has not taken the time to investigate how many democrats are registered in Deschutes and Jackson Counties. They continue to just think it is fashionable to concede anything east of the Cascades to the republicans.

@ Rebecca Whetstine

Regarding John McCain and his record on soc. sec. I am happy to give you in his own words that he supported George W. Bush's privatization plan for social security, his statement in 2004 that he supports "private accounts", another word for privatization. I suggest you go troll for McCain on a more receptive site.

This Ad just out- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oV9GZUtCgPc

This clip from 2004- McCain's flip-flop http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyBwMy27Aoc

@ Rebecca

"Without privatization, I don’t see how you can possibly, over time, make sure that young Americans are able to receive Social Security benefits." - John McCain

Sound byte, my friend. So you devolve to name calling so easily? I'm impressed with your critical thinking skills, then. I'm voting for Obama. HOWEVER, wise old troll baiter, I am annoying folks here, I suppose, but being unwilling to put on blinkers and ignore where OUR candidate is guilty of slippage into the same lying as the other folks are engaging. And if you persist in twisting the contextual history, I'm not your fan either.

Dig deeper. Abandon your laborious STANCE. The trick he is playing with this one is to create a two-tiered system as to which funds are to be opened up to the markets; but I will reiterate, since you seem resistant to using more than a broad brush to suit your creative impulse -- the plan he's got in his head at LAST (ahem....... that might be much later than 2004, so perhaps you might do some thinking closer to 2008?) detailed accounting did not touch older folks' already-existing monies, and did NOT feed the ENTIRETY to the Wall Street Mobsters. The dreadful fault in his new idea was the fact that he would open up PORTIONS of the monies to allow the holders to play them on the markets within a very tightly delineated selection of offerings. BAD idea. Those not smart enough to really understand what they were doing would overestimate their abilities. And the frailties of favoritism surely would plague the scrum over WHOSE offerings would make up the panel from which the latter-day socially secured might select.

I cringed and raged when I first heard (in the media, just like you, my friend) the generic quote you are now foisting. I was mad as hell and flummoxed right along with the rest. It's possible this idiot even meant to just throw it to the howlies back then. That's all I ever heard on it. Later research here shows that this is not what he now espouses. It has shifted, apparently.

I have no softness in my heart for McCain. But I'm sick of people not being specific about their content. His entire idea is so completely bad, I agree with YOU. BUT: I'm trying to make the point, my friend, that there's a bit more detail to it than that thousand foot view statement.

I prefer to pick apart exactly what is wrong with his ideas. That byte above is no doubt removed from context, and I mean TOTAL context of ongoing discussion.

His idea is bad, bad, bad and bad. And I wish you would refrain from calling me a troll. It's unbelievably rude and unwarranted.

This is like "political lies 101" material, nothing deeply cerebral, but it seems like it might fit the general level of discussion in this thread just now -- I myself am not too proud to say that primer-level language can be helpful to me, since I do not feel the need to pretend I know all about everything, or much about anything.

So as not to waste my time on useless resources, I checked it with folks I trust who have reliable thinking skills and who are politically-experienced: Civiletti said this is a group that carries mainstream bias, but works hard to be even-handed. A good place to factcheck your own bigotries, really.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_social_security_whopper.html

@ Rebecca

It's simply sophistry and duplicity to say that diverting money out of the Soc. Sec. system into Wall Street is not privatization. Soc. Sec. is founded on a covenant between the generations where the system is funded by those who are working. When you stop funding the system by those who are working it goes bankrupt. Two tier system of private accounts is a lie. It's a strategy to move it out of a public defined benefit system of social insurance into a private system where everyone draws from an individual private account based on how well the stock market performs and or how badly you have been ripped off by your fund manager. The Dems win this argument hands down. But you can argue this till the cows come home but PRIVATE ACCOUNTS = PRIVATIZATION If you buy into McCain's lie then you are simply shilling for him and his party of thieves and liars who want to turn over what little retirement security we have in this country to the gambling casino den of robbers we have on Wall St.